Johjima Power

You know, I remember Jeff Brantley of ESPN claiming back in May that Johjima was his "biggest disappointment" of the season. One month later, Brantley appears to look like a fool. While he still hasn't gotten the very best out of the pitching staff, he has definitely made this team better. The M's are now at .500, something I didn't think would be possible for them this season.

He was a good power hitter who also hit for average with the Hawks, and it seems like he's already well-adjusted to Major League pitching. I didn't see that homer binge coming, though.

Brantley obviously has bias and picked on a guy who really didn't deserve to be picked on. All I've seen of Johjima this year is a great all around catcher who always has a smile on his face, gets along with everybody, and does anything he can to pick up his teammates, both emotionally and with the bat. From what I've seen of his work in Fukuoka, it's all just a continuation of what he was doing in Japan.

By the way, I'm really starting to like this Mariners team. Reminds me a lot of how psyched I was for the White Sox when I was still in Illinois.

Johjima has had a great year, all around, offensive and defensive wise. He has adapted real well, especially in learning English.

Of late, Johjima has been on fire, in June he has been batting .346 with 5 HRs and 16 RBI [MLB Stats].

Ichiro, Jose Lopez, Ibanez, Betancourt, and Johjima have been some of the bright parts of the Mariners' offense. Seattle is starting to look good again.

Now to Brantley and the numerous sportswriters:

With Jeff Brantley is another one of ESPN's analysts who doesn't have a clue. Yes, there are some on ESPN who are good and some who are very good, like Tim Kurkijan, Jayson Stark, Jim Caple, and Peter Gammons. Though you see Kurkijan and Stark about as much as you see World Series pennants in Wrigley Field.

The majority of former players who are analysts on ESPN aren't worth taking seriously. Nothing Brantley says is worth saying. Brantley is like Rob Dibble who said Ichiro would struggle his rookie year not batting over .280, or Rob Neyer who said Ichiro is no George Sisler (when Neyer wasn't alive when Sisler played).

Joe Morgan said we should have two records, a 154-game record and a 162-game hit record. Such utter-rubbish, the same rubbish from Morgan who says Japanese baseball is equal to AA baseball.

Neyer is too much of a stat-freak in the model of Bill James (who he used to work as a intern to be taken seriously most times). Neyer looks too much into stats to see the whole picture.

Brantley, as I said earlier, is just a former player who acts like he knows it all, same with Dibble, both media circuses. Joe Morgan is a former Hall of Famer who's smarter than Brantley, Kruk, and company and should just know better, but he also suffers from the same problem Brantley, Kruk, and company have, he also thinks he knows everything.

I have to disagree with you about Neyer. I used to read him all the time before ESPN made him write exclusively for the paid insider section of their website. Comparing Sisler with Ichiro can only be done at a statistical level, and Sisler did have better stats than Ichiro. Of course, such comparisons shouldn't diminish Ichiro's single season hit record. No one's saying Ichiro's 2004 season was the greatest ever, just he had more hits than anyone ever did.

Yes, Sisler did have better stats than Ichiro, but also had more support in his run to 257. Neyer continues to bash the type of player Ichiro is as useless to the Mariners.

Without Ichiro, the Mariners would be nothing, which Neyer and all the Bill James stats in the world fail to realize. Ichiro is the most valuable player on the field and off the field to the Mariners. This is what Neyer fails to realize. Ichiro is Seattle, just like what Griffey was to them in the 1990s, even to a higher extent though.

Like this one from a Rob Neyer May 29, 2003 ESPN article:

"Ichiro's hitting .300, but apparently isn't a superstar anyway." [Full Article]

What in the world is that supposed to mean Neyer? Stats aren't everything, Neyer. Yes they are nice every once in a while, but once in a while Neyer you need to look beyond them. That's why I take anything Neyer takes with a grain of salt, just not with Ichiro, just anyone. Neyer is too much in the mold of Bill James.

It's like I said above, take Ichiro away from Seattle and notice the difference. Maybe Neyer needs to mention this in an article. This is why I take people like Kurkijan, Gammons, Caple, and Stark more seriously; they don't report based on statistics alone. Like I said, stats are nice to a certain level, but don't tell the whole story, which prevents Neyer from being a good writer.

Sisler's 1920s St.Louis Browns, in which Sisler achieved his 257 hits, gave Sisler more protection and opportunities than Seattle did with Ichiro. St.Louis had Jack Tobin, Baby Doll Jacobsen, and Ken Williams. Neyer fails to mention that. The 2004 Seattle Mariners without Ichiro batted .252 as a team [Baseball-Reference]. Without, Sisler in 1920, the Browns would still bat .295 as a team [Baseball-Reference].

Yes, while Sisler was the most important part of the 1920 Browns, his ride to 257 hits was easier, too.

Sorry to break it to you, but the Mariners are nothing with Ichiro.

Johjima is the best. I love his bat flip, too.

To get back on topic, Johjima is having a splendid season. It's nice to see him thrive in a different environment and to silence the naysayers.

To Rob Neyer's "Ichiro's hitting .300, but apparently isn't a superstar anyway" quote, Brooks-san asked, "What in the world is that supposed to mean Neyer?"

It's really a matter of semantics when you talk about whether someone is a "superstar." Sure, Ichiro has been the best player in Seattle ever since his first season. Does that make him a superstar? Well, certainly in 2001, 2004, and so far this year. But I don't think he would be one of the top-10 players in baseball say, in 2005, and may or may not be considered a superstar then.

- Sisler's 1920s St.Louis Browns, in which Sisler achieved his 257 hits, gave Sisler more protection and opportunities than Seattle did with Ichiro.

I fail to see how the issue of protection is relevant for breaking the hit record, especially for a leadoff hitter who doesn't walk very often.

One personal observation to add here, regarding Ichiro. I defy anyone to go to a game at Safeco, watch the man wield his bat, and not be convinced that this is one of the greatest players in the history of the game.

I remember similar chills when I was a child watching Jim Palmer pitch, and seeing Don Mattingly when he first came up with the Yankees.

Debate the stats all you want. Ichiro is a Hall-of-Famer, and that's all there is to say.

I saw him once when he came to Toronto, and he went 0 for 5. Well, but I've seen him many times on TV ever since his rookie year with Orix (plus I've seen his impressive batting stats throughout the years). I sure hope that he gets into the HOF, and he should just based on his uncanny ability to get hits, being perhaps the best defensive right fielder of all-time should count too.

However, even he has had great and not so great seasons. Stats are not perfect, but they are the only way we have to evaluate players objectively. I realize that there are lots of intangibles a player contributes to his team that aren't captured by current stats (or indicators that we care about), but that doesn't mean we can't get a reasonble approximation of a player's contribution from them. Plus, people's understanding about baseball stats is always improving, and that approximation will only get better in the future.